Oakland RCV
  • Home
    • For Voters
    • For Candidates
    • For Press
  • About Us
  • What's RCV?
  • RCV Supporters
  • Contact Us
  • Take Action
  • Resources

For Press

This page serves to  illustrate the ins-and-outs of this process to ensure that all members of the community are receiving clear and correct information.

Surprising Facts about Ranked Choice Voting in the Bay Area

10/17/2014

0 Comments

 
Ranked choice voting (RCV) ballots are already being cast by some early and absentee voters in the four Bay Area cities holding RCV elections this November: Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco, and San Leandro. Unlike Bay Area cities and counties that limited the November ballot to just two candidates in the historically low turnout primary last June (with some cities picking their winners then, even when the winner finished with far less than 50%, as in Hayward), RCV cities are presenting voters with a full array of candidates in a number of key races, most notably mayoral elections in Oakland and San Leandro. 

In light of the upcoming elections, we wanted to share a few facts about ranked choice voting:

Since adoption of ranked choice voting, Oakland winners earn more votes: Of the 18 Oakland offices elected by RCV in 2010 and 2012, the winner had more votes than the winner of the previous non-RCV election in 16 of them. This is a common pattern in RCV elections that avoid electing winners in low-turnout June primaries or December runoffs.

Fewer voters now skip city elections: Voters are more engaged in city elections with RCV. The four Bay Area cities with RCV all hold key elections when the top of the ballot is a high-profile race like president or governor. Traditionally, a good number of voters skip their city elections, but that number has declined sharply since adoption of RCV. San Francisco provides a good example. In the 16 RCV elections for Board of Supervisors that required multiple rounds to determine a winner in 2004-2013, the median proportion of voters that skipped this race on their ballots was 9.7%. In the 11 elections for Board of Supervisors that went to runoffs between 2000 and 2003, before the adoption of RCV, the median was 14.4%, nearly 50% higher.

Candidates must treat every voter as a swing voter, and make an affirmative case: With RCV, the strongest candidates will need to treat every voter as a potential swing voter. In a vote-for-one system, candidates write off anyone who is settled on another choice. But with RCV, there is a direct incentive to find common ground with such voters to earn a second or third choice. This argument for RCV has been made eloquently by the winners of the most recent RCV elections for mayor of Minneapolis and Portland, Maine.

Scholars find RCV has a clear impact on civility and substance: FairVote is part of major scholarly study on the effect of ranked choice voting on the civility and substance of campaigns. Initial findings, summarized here, suggest that RCV is having a big impact. Voters from RCV cities were significantly less likely to report that candidates criticized one another “a great deal” than were voters from non-RCV cities (5% to 25%) and were nearly three times as likely to say that candidates had not criticized one another at all (36% to 12%). RCV city voters were also significantly more likely to indicate that they were "very satisfied" with campaigns, and over 60% of respondents in RCV cities supported the system.

Bay Area voters had more trouble with the first Top Two primary ballots than RCV: The huge majority of voters in Bay Area cities handle RCV ballots well. As one measure, less than 0.4% of voters invalidated their ballots in their first contested mayoral elections with RCV in these cities. But it was another story with the first Top Two primary ballot in June 2012. In that election, more than 1.5% of voters cast an invalid ballot in the U.S. Senate primary in Berkeley and San Francisco, and more than 4.5% of voters did so in the Senate primary in Oakland and San Leandro. That means that more than 15 times as many Oakland and San Leandro voters invalidated their ballot in their first-ever Top Two primary election for Senate compared to their first-ever mayoral election with RCV.

RCV winners defeat their strongest opponent 1-on-1, as pollsters are now showing: With RCV, no voter ever has their ballot count for more than one candidate at a time. Voters rank the candidates, and all first choices are tallied. Last-place candidates are eliminated, and their ballots are added to the totals of their voters’ next choices until one candidate wins with more than half the votes. Whenever the election comes down to two candidates in the final round, as when Jean Quan defeated Don Perata in the 2010 mayoral race in Oakland, the winner is the candidate who wins 1-on-1. A poll in early September 2010 showed that Quan was already neck-and-neck with Perata in a one-on-one comparison, but the pollster instead focused on less useful aggregate totals of first, second, and third choices. We are encouraged to see that pollsters this year are providing those 1-on-1 comparisons to show just where the state of the race is.

The limit of 3 rankings is due to voting equipment, not the law: Once Alameda County and San Francisco secure voting equipment that allows for more rankings, as is already being done elsewhere, Bay Area cities will allow voters to rank more candidates. This will be helpful in elections with large fields, but note that having three rankings already provides voters with a three-times greater chance to have their vote count than Top Two election systems with large fields.

Voting smart is a part of all Bay Area elections: Given the current limitation of three rankings, voters who want to have their vote count in the final round would be wise to vote for their true favorite with their first choice, and then use their second and third choice for acceptable candidates who seem likely to get to the final round. That is going to happen with the great majority of voters regardless, but RCV gives voters who support lesser known candidates the freedom to vote their conscience without wasting their ballot.

If Oakland still had its old runoff system, it would have eliminated all but two candidates in a low-turnout, unrepresentative June primary. In such a contest, you would have needed to be tactical with your one and only vote and ignored any candidate who didn't seem to have a chance to win. It's quite possible that an absolute majority of voters would have voted for losing candidates, as was the case in last year’s Boston mayoral election, in which the primary "winners" earned just 18% and 16% of the vote (and were two white men, finishing just ahead of several candidates of color).

Electing the most representative candidate: There have been dozens of hotly contested RCV races in the Bay Area, including 31 in which there was an "instant runoff" to determine the winner, and five in which the ultimate winner trailed in first choices. In every single election, the winner has been the candidate who defeats all other candidates when matched against them 1-on-1.

We look forward to this year's elections with anticipation. Most candidates will lose, but there is a winner: voters who have the chance to engage with more campaigns, vote for their true favorite and elect a candidate who has proven their ability to represent voters in city government.

0 Comments

Ranked Choice Voting Basics for Press

10/16/2014

0 Comments

 
What is RCV?
 Ranked choice voting (also known as instant runoff voting) allows voters to rank a first, second, and third choice candidate for a single office. This makes it possible to elect local officials by majority vote without the need for a separate runoff election.

How does RCV work?
Votes are first distributed by first choices. If no candidate has more than half of those votes, then the candidate with the fewest first choices is eliminated. The voters who selected the defeated candidate as a first choice will then have their votes added to the totals of their next choice. This process continues until a candidate has more than half of the active votes. The candidate with a majority among the remaining candidates is declared the winner.

When did Oakland adopt RCV?
Oakland adopted ranked choice voting through a charter amendment in 2006. The city council voted 6-2 to place it on the ballot, and voters approved it with 69% support. 

Has Oakland used RCV before?
Yes. Oakland used RCV in 2010 and 2012.

Who does Oakland elect using RCV?
In Oakland, RCV is used to elect the Mayor, City Council Members, City Attorney, City Auditor, and School Board members. On November 4th, ranked choice voting will be used to elect the Mayor, City Auditor, District 2 City Councilmember, District 4 City Councilmember, District 6 City Councilmember, District 2 School Board Member, District 4 School Board Member, and District 6 School Board Member.

How is RCV different from non-RCV elections?
  1. RCV eliminates the need for a runoff election. 
  2. Voters rank candidates in order of preference instead of only selecting one candidate, knowing that if their first choice candidate cannot  win, their vote will go to their second choice candidate. 
  3. Candidates need to have a majority of the active ballots to win. 

How does a voter fill out a ranked choice ballot?
  1. Voters mark their first preference (the candidate they love) in the first column.
  2. Voters mark their second preference (the candidate they like), in the second column.
  3. Voters mark their third preference (the candidate they can live with), in the third column.

What if  voters only rank one candidate?
Voters have the option of ranking only one candidate. However, if that candidate is eliminated and no back-up choices are indicated, that ballot becomes “exhausted” and does not continue in the remaining rounds of counting. It is in the best interest of the voter as well as the candidates to use all rankings. By ranking beyond a first choice, voters are able to stay involved in the electoral process. It is essential for candidates to build support through the accumulation of second and third choices as other candidates are eliminated.  

What happens if a voter chooses one candidate for all rankings?
If a voter selects the same candidate for more than one ranking the outcome is the same as only indicating a first choice on their ballot. Each ballot counts for one candidate at a time. Listing a candidate for more than one ranking does not strengthen your vote for that candidate.  It simply means that if that candidate is eliminated your vote is exhausted. Remember, ranking a lower choice can never hurt the voter’s first choice. 

What if voters rank multiple candidates for one of their 3 choices?
Each voter has exactly one vote in each round. If a voter gives more than one candidate the same ranking, that would be an overvote. It would be no different than attempting to vote for 2 candidates when only allowed to vote for 1. If a voter were to make this error they would be able to get a new ballot and correct the mistake. 

Does RCV give some voters more votes than others?
No. In each round a voter’s ballot counts for their highest-ranked candidate. If your first choice candidate is still viable, your ballot will stay with that candidate. Just like in a two-round runoff, if your favorite candidate loses you must select one of the remaining candidates. RCV completes this same process but in one election instead of two. Second or third choices ONLY matter when a voter’s first choice candidate loses. 

Did Jean Quan win the mayoral election in 2010 only by being everyone’s second choice?
No. In the 2010 mayoral election, there were several strong candidates. The leader in first choices was Don Perata. But his 33% of the vote was well short of a majority of 50% plus one. Jean Quan was second in first choices with 24%. So the election needed to go to an instant runoff.

In the RCV tally, last-place candidates were eliminated one by one, and ballots cast for these losing candidates were added to the totals of the candidates ranked next on each ballot. This continued until only Perata and Quan remained. By the time of this final instant runoff, Quan had 52% of the vote and Perata had 48%. This was the “head to head” result between these two candidates - and very close to what a poll showed the outcome would be that was taken nearly two months before the election.

What does RCV do?
  • Accommodates voter choice to elect credible winners in event of 3 or more candidates.
  • Saves localities, taxpayers and candidates money by eliminating the primary election.
  • Officials are elected in one general election, where turnout tends to be much higher than in a primary or runoff election. 
  • Discourages excessive negative campaigning because victories may require candidates to be the 2nd or 3rd choices of the supporters of opponents.

What does RCV NOT do?

  • Force voters to rank more than one candidate. 
  • Favor one party or group over another.
  • Allow voters more than one vote.
  • Elect candidates that the majority opposes. 

How does ranking candidates give voters more power?
In this video, the speaker makes the case that ranking candidates means more power for voters. Voters should rank three candidates unless they are indifferent to all but one or two candidates. By ranking beyond a first choice, voters are able to stay involved in the electoral process. They can help a second choice win and also can help defeat their last choice. 

When candidates know that most voters will be ranking candidates, they have to reach out to more voters if they believe the election will be decided in an instant runoff. If a voter indicates first choice support for someone else, the candidate still has a reason to earn that voter’s second or third choice. That also gives voters more power. 

Is RCV used in places other than Oakland?
Yes. RCV is used across the US and around the world. In the Bay Area, RCV is used in neighboring cities of Berkeley, San Leandro, and San Francisco. It has been implemented in Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN and Portland, ME. RCV is used to elect the Mayor of London, England, the President of Ireland, and the House of Representatives in Australia. Follow this link to see the full list of where RCV is used. 

Do voters understand RCV?
Yes. Voters overwhelmingly understand RCV. This video was taken during the 2013 Minneapolis municipal elections, and it shows that voters overwhelmingly understood the system and appreciated how easy and effective it was to use.



0 Comments

    Archives

    October 2014
    November 2010

    RSS Feed


Picture
Contact Us | Follow Us